Caligula remains the only full length and detailed scholarly analysis in English of this emperor's reign. However, since publication of the original there have been considerable scholarly advances in what we know about this emperor specifically, and also about the general period in which he functioned, while newly discovered inscriptions and major archaeological projects have necessitated a rethinking of many of our earlier conclusions about early imperial history. This new edition constitutes a major revision of the original text. Embodying the latest discoveries and thinking it seeks to make more lucid and comprehensible those aspects of the reign that are particularly daunting to the non-specialist.

The Roman Empire has always exercised a considerable fascination. Among its numerous colourful personalities, no emperor, with the possible exception of Nero, has attracted more popular attention than Caligula, who has a reputation, whether deserved or not, as the quintessential mad and dangerous ruler.

The first edition of this book established itself as the standard study of Caligula. It remains the only full length and detailed scholarly analysis in English of this emperor’s reign, and has been translated into a number of languages. But the study of Classical antiquity is not a static phenomenon, and scholars are engaged in a persistent quest to upgrade our knowledge and thinking about the ancient past. In the thirty years since publication of the original Caligula there have been considerable scholarly advances in what we know about this emperor specifically, and also about the general period in which he functioned, while newly discovered inscriptions and major archaeological projects have necessitated a rethinking of many of our earlier conclusions about early imperial history. This new edition constitutes a major revision and, in places, a major rewriting, of the original text. Maintaining the reader-friendly structure and organisation of its predecessor, it embodies the latest discoveries and the latest thinking, seeking to make more lucid and comprehensible those aspects of the reign that are particularly daunting to the non-specialist. Like the original, this revised Caligula is intended to satisfy the requirements of the scholarly community while appealing to a broad and general readership.

]]>Homepage, Books, Research & Reference, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-03-30T13:22:29+00:00Religious Dissent in the Roman Empirehttp://www.psypress.com/articles/religious_dissent_in_the_roman_empire/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.223592015-03-30T13:11:05Q Violence in Judaea at the Time of Nero

By Vasily Rudich

Religious Dissent in the Roman Empire is an important study for people interested in Roman and Jewish history, religious psychology and religious extremism, cultural interaction and the roots of violence.

Religious Dissent in the Roman Empire is the third installment in Vasily Rudich’s trilogy on the psychology of discontent in the Roman Empire at the time of Nero. Unlike his earlier books, it deals not with political dissidence, but with religious dissent, especially in its violent form. Against the broad background of Second Temple Judaism and Judaea’s history under Rome’s rule, Rudich discusses various manifestations of religious dissent as distinct from the mainstream beliefs and directed against both the foreign occupier and the priestly establishment. This book offers the methodological framework for the analysis of the religious dissent mindset, which it considers a recurrent historical phenomenon that may play a major role in different periods and cultures. In this respect, its findings are also relevant to the rise of religious violence in the world today and provide further insights into its persistent motives and paradigms. Religious Dissent in the Roman Empire is an important study for people interested in Roman and Jewish history, religious psychology and religious extremism, cultural interaction and the roots of violence.

]]>Homepage, Books, Research & Reference, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-03-30T13:11:05+00:00Cicero: The Philosophy of a Roman Sceptichttp://www.psypress.com/articles/cicero_the_philosophy_of_a_roman_sceptic/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.222872015-03-19T20:17:44Q
Cicero’s philosophical works introduced Latin audiences to the ideas of the Stoics, Epicureans and other schools and figures of the post-Aristotelian period, thus influencing the transmission of those ideas through later history. While Cicero’s value as documentary evidence for the Hellenistic schools is unquestioned, Cicero: The Philosophy of a Roman Sceptic explores his writings as works of philosophy that do more than simply synthesize the thought of others, but instead offer a unique viewpoint of their own.

In this volume Raphael Woolf describes and evaluates Cicero’s philosophical achievements, paying particular attention to his relation to those philosophers he draws upon in his works, his Romanizing of Greek philosophy, and his own sceptical and dialectical outlook. The volume aims, using the best tools of philosophical, philological and historical analysis, to do Cicero justice as a distinctive philosophical voice.

Situating Cicero’s work in its historical and political context, this volume provides a detailed analysis of the thought of one of the finest orators and writers of the Roman period. Written in an accessible and engaging style, Cicero: The Philosophy of a Roman Sceptic is a key resource for those interested in Cicero’s role in shaping Classical philosophy.

We all hope for good health and long life. But we all have experience of birth, death, disease and injury and so in the course of a lifetime we all encounter many doctors, who at times play a very important part in our lives. In the affluent west today all doctors have undergone extensive professional training and are subject to certain recognized standards. This training and these standards are often thought to be conditioned by the conduct and ideals of Hippocrates, a Greek physician of the fifth century BC who was contemporary with the Athenians Socrates, Sophocles, and Pericles, though his life was spent far from Athens: born in the southern island of Kos, he died in northern Thessaly. But although scores of medical works, collected in The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus, are attributed to Hippocrates, it is impossible to determine which, if any, are ‘genuine’: on this centers the old ‘Hippocratic Question’. Certainly, no coherent picture emerges from a reading of them. The content is nevertheless fascinating in its diversity. The collection contains information not only on fundamental medical matters, such as anatomy, physiology, pathology, gynecology, and therapeutics, but also on many wider topics, including a range of environmental, ethical and social issues. There is something for everyone there!

To understand the collection we have to understand its connections with other works and writers of the classical period, such as the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, the history of Herodotus and even the play of tragedy and comedy, written in verse: there was a two way process of interaction. Ultimately, it seems that The ‘Hippocratic’ Corpus is not a monolithic foundation for all of western medicine but rather a set of variations on contemporary themes. Some of these variations turn out to be rather surprising. The Hippocratic Oath is not all it is believed to be. The theory of four bodily humors is not fundamentally Hippocratic. But at the same time some of the themes are perennial in their social and cultural implications: Greek doctors, like doctors in all ages, did their best to bring about the good health and long life wished for by us all.

]]>Homepage, General Interest, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-03-16T16:57:14+00:00Rediscover tandfebooks with five free-to-view Classical Studies titleshttp://www.psypress.com/articles/rediscover_tandfebooks_with_five_free-to-view_classical_studies_titles/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.220692015-03-02T15:24:30Q
With over 50,000 eBooks across the humanities, social sciences and education Taylor & Francis eBooks provides direct access to a wealth of quality academic content for research and study.

All titles purchased by your institution from March 1st 2015 onwards will be DRM-free, meaning that you can access, print and copy and paste without any restrictions at all. In addition new powerful filtered search enables you to effortlessly reach the most relevant content. Rediscover how tandfebooks can help you.

To celebrate, we have made five titles in Classical Studies free to view on Taylor & Francis eBooks until the end of April - why not take a look?

The following five titles are free to view on Taylor & Francis ebooks until the end of April:

Free trials of Taylor & Francis eBooks are available for your institution - simply fill in this form and we will get in touch with your librarian.

]]>Homepage, News, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-03-02T15:24:30+00:00Imagining Ancient Cities in Film: From Babylon to Cinecittàhttp://www.psypress.com/articles/imagining_ancient_cities_in_film_from_babylon_to_cinecitta/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.220512015-02-27T20:12:48Q
"Charting a century and more of film and television, this adventurous and timely critical survey will be an invaluable companion for anyone interested in how, and why, modern cultures represent the ancient world in the ways that they do." – Gideon Nisbet, University of Birmingham, UK

In film imagery, urban spaces show up not only as spatial settings of a story, but also as projected ideas and forms that aim to recreate and capture the spirit of cultures, societies and epochs. Some cinematic cities have even managed to transcend fiction to become part of modern collective memory. Can we imagine a futuristic city not inspired at least remotely by Fritz Lang’s Metropolis? In the same way, ancient Babylon, Troy and Rome can hardly be shaped in popular imagination without conscious or subconscious references to the striking visions of Griffiths’ Intolerance, Petersen’s Troy and Scott’s Gladiator, to mention only a few influential examples. Imagining Ancient Cities in Film explores for the first time in scholarship film representations of cities of the Ancient World from early cinema to the 21st century.

The volume analyzes the different choices made by filmmakers, art designers and screen writers to recreate ancient urban spaces as more or less convincing settings of mythical and historical events. In looking behind and beyond intended archaeological accuracy, symbolic fantasy, primitivism, exoticism and Hollywood-esque monumentality, this volume pays particular attention to the depiction of cities as faces of ancient civilizations, but also as containers of moral ideas and cultural fashions deeply rooted in the contemporary zeitgeist and in continuously revisited traditions.

]]>Homepage, Books, Research & Reference, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-02-27T20:12:48+00:00Sex in Antiquityhttp://www.psypress.com/articles/sex_in_antiquity/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.219952015-02-24T14:20:32QExploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World

Edited by Mark Masterson, Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz, and James Robson

Looking at sex and sexuality from a variety of historical, sociological and theoretical perspectives, as represented in a variety of media, Sex in Antiquity represents a vibrant picture of the discipline of ancient gender and sexuality studies, showcasing the work of leading international scholars as well as that of emerging talents and new voices.

Sexuality and gender in the ancient world is an area of research that has grown quickly with often sudden shifts in focus and theoretical standpoints. This volume contextualises these shifts while putting in place new ideas and avenues of exploration that further develop this lively field or set of disciplines. This broad study also includes studies of gender and sexuality in the Ancient Near East which not only provide rich consideration of those areas but also provide a comparative perspective not often found in such collections. Sex in Antiquity is a major contribution to the field of ancient gender and sexuality studies.

]]>Homepage, Books, Research & Reference, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-02-24T14:20:32+00:00Tom Stevenson on the motives of Julius Caesarhttp://www.psypress.com/articles/tom_stevenson_on_the_motives_of_julius_caesar/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.217032015-02-09T15:57:49Q
Tom Stevenson, author of Julius Caesar and the Transformation of the Roman Republic, discusses how Julius Caesar's aims, motives, and ideas were influenced by the historical contexts and circumstances that surrounded him.

Recent scholarly concentration on historical processes has not undermined the widespread interest in biography, nor the basic importance of individuals as agents of change and models for emulation. People and processes go together or operate in tandem. But the trend away from histories written about ‘the great man’ or ‘great men’ underlines the crucial fact that individuals operate in particular historical contexts or circumstances. Julius Caesar, for example, was a (free) Roman noble (man) born in 100 BC at a time of great internal and external upheaval. Each of these characteristics was mightily determinant of the type of career he could have. They were also absolutely fundamental to the aims, motives and ideas that would drive him. Caesar was a Roman. His particular Roman contexts supplied the political, social and ethical drivers of his extraordinary career.

When these are focused upon, it soon becomes obvious that hindsight interpretations of Caesar’s career are dreadfully flawed. He was not a man who sought to become Rome’s king from an early age. He was not a man who showed consistent enmity towards a ‘decadent’ nobility, seeking to supplant the power of the Senate with the power of the People. Such aims would not have been realistic for a man who faced numerous obstacles at every stage of his career. Greatness was by no means assured. Success was not inevitable. It would be wrong to start with the dictator of his final years and read backwards to his early days, as some eminent historians have done.

The reality is that Caesar was both typical and extraordinary, and his times were formative of him and formed by him. His family was noble, but it had been weak for many generations. His early career was by no means extraordinary. He could not expect the kind of career trajectory that had become available to Pompey the Great. His ambition did not extend beyond the next magistracy in the sequence of offices. He sought military glory because it was expected of a noble of his standing, not because he planned from the start to eclipse Pompey and Crassus, the leading figures of his age, whose achievements probably seemed out-of-this-world to the majority of their peers. Caesar’s conquests in Gaul were brilliant in military terms, but his initial plans seem not to have involved Gaul at all, and he was very lucky at numerous points. The civil war seems not to have been Caesar’s preference. He was no angel, but his enemies pushed him to the brink, and refused to let up. He probably should not have won the civil war, but the prowess and spirit of his veterans proved decisive, and his profound belief in his good fortune was well placed. In his final years, while ruling Rome as dictator, his reforms were hardly revolutionary and hardly designed to empower the People at the expense of the Senate. The great honours bestowed upon him did not make him Rome’s king, and it now seems unlikely that divine honours indicate a growing megalomania on Caesar’s part. They were not upsetting to Roman sensibilities. His monarchic power, control of office-holding, and decision not to stand down were eventually intolerable to a large number of nobles, even some who had been his friends. Their conspiracy resulted in Caesar’s assassination on the Ides of March 44 BC.

Caesar was clearly important, and his image continues to motivate, whether in contemporary democracy debates in Europe or in discourse about appropriate models for US presidents. But he was a leader, a general and a politician, not a king or a god or a prescient being. His career provides cautionary lessons about rampant self-promotion, individualism, and hunger for power. Such behaviour brings the individual nothing (as Plutarch noted) and plunges contemporaries into numerous, ongoing currents of conflict.

Was Caesar seeking to become Rome’s king?

A number of famous historians, in the wake of the German master Theodor Mommsen, have argued that Caesar could see from a young age that the Roman Republic was doomed. It was dominated by a corrupt and violent nobility, whose members fought one another but were united in exploiting the ordinary inhabitants of Rome and the provinces. The only answer was for him to aim at supplanting the decadent nobility by becoming Rome’s king, supported by the common people. This reconstruction, however, seems plainly influenced by hindsight, viz. the dictatorship of his final years has coloured the interpretation of his entire career. The reality was much less certain, and much less aimed at autocratic dominance of the Roman state.

Was Caesar a populist? Did he genuinely have the interests of the Roman people at heart, or did he simply use them for his own ends?

There are probably two points to make here. First, it seems unlikely that Caesar sought a popular monarchy and the end of the Roman nobility. His relations with members of the nobility were good and bad, according to different individuals and changing circumstances. He even married Sulla’s granddaughter Pompeia. His attitude was not monolithic or unchanging. Second, Caesar sought power through various combinations of groups, not simply through appeals to the Roman People. Moreover, there were times when he was opposed by tribunes of the plebs, and when he incurred the ire of crowds of citizens. He was not merely a one-trick pony in political terms, and the question of his ‘true’ attitude to the People tends to evaporate, if it is accepted that he was not seeking a popular monarchy from a young age.

How important were Caesar’s relations with his family?

This is a question that would repay further research, but one important point to make is that the women of Caesar’s family were formidable, ambitious, and probably more influential on him than is generally recognised. His aunt Julia married the hero Gaius Marius, who died in 86 BC. His mother Aurelia was, according to Tacitus and others, one of the great women of the Republic. Her bearing and speech helped in shaping the oratorical brilliance of her son. Her husband, Caesar’s father, died in 85 BC, so that the young Caesar became the head of his household at about the time that he became an adult in Roman terms (age 15). It seems likely that Caesar’s mother and aunt provided important advice when the young man was contemplating how to make his mark in a dangerous and volatile world.

Who was responsible for the outbreak of the civil war?

At one time the outbreak of the civil war (January 49 BC) was seen as the inevitable consequence of Caesar’s brilliant victories in Gaul, as though he felt emboldened to seek sole power or his enemies felt that he could not be left alone. Caesar did his share of bullying, but it now seems that Pompey was controlling the pace and substance of negotiations more than has been recognised, and that the real flies in the ointment were the optimates – the reactionary senators with whom Caesar had had numerous dramatic confrontations, especially during his consulship in 59 BC. They refused to compromise, even when their contemporaries in the Senate indicated clearly that it was time to do so. When war was declared, the moderates were left with no choice but to pick sides. It says a lot that the vast majority of them went over to Pompey, thinking that he was more likely to win.

Why did Caesar win?

Caesar was undeniably fortunate. He criticises Pompey’s strategy in his Commentaries, but in reality Pompey did a good job at weakening Caesar’s troops, forcing them to endure starvation and constant movement in search of supplies and advantageous ground. Pompey knew that his inexperienced infantry would find the going exceedingly hard against the battle-hardened veterans of Gaul. He was absolutely right. His massive superiority in cavalry and infantry was no match for the extraordinary bravery and fighting abilities of Caesar’s men. For his part, Caesar inspired his men brilliantly, and proved a master tactician, deploying his units superbly at Pharsalus, and committing his reserves at precisely the right time. The combinations proved irresistible.

Why was he murdered? What does his assassination tell us about his political wisdom or self-awareness or self-evaluation?

Caesar was murdered for what he was, not for what he might become. There were rumours that he wanted to be Rome’s king, but it seems obvious that what really upset Caesar’s contemporaries was his autocratic power, his control of office-holding, and his decision not to stand down from power, as Sulla had done. It became increasingly obvious that the traditional pattern of noble competition for office was at an end, and that men would hold office according to Caesar’s whim. Caesar probably thought that he had no choice but to continue as dictator, for if he stood down, there was nothing to stop the renewal of noble conflict and the likely advent of another civil war. In thinking this way, however, Caesar seems not to have remembered the passion with which he himself had sought office, and his attitude to Sulla’s dominance. He had not grown megalomaniacal or thoughtless, but he did miscalculate the readiness and ability of his contemporaries to bring him down. This miscalculation cost him his life and resulted in further civil war – Caesar had been right about that.

Tom Stevenson is Senior Lecturer in Classics and Ancient History at the University of Queensland, Australia.

]]>Homepage, Books, General Interest, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-02-09T15:57:49+00:00Did you see these Author Interviews in 2014?http://www.psypress.com/articles/did_you_see_these_author_interviews_in_20144/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.216262015-02-02T19:55:01Q
We hope you got the chance to read our author interviews and articles in 2014, but in case you didn’t, we’ve put them all in one place to make them easily accessible.

]]>Homepage, Books, General Interest, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-02-02T19:55:01+00:00Discover Routledge’s Outstanding Academic Titles 2014!http://www.psypress.com/articles/discover_routledges_outstanding_academic_titles_20142/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.215052015-01-23T15:08:20Q
Routledge had more than 275 titles recommended by Choice magazine in 2014, and we are honored that 32 of these have been selected as Choice Outstanding Academic Titles 2014!

Our Choice-recommended titles are now available as ebooks on tandfebooks.com, either to purchase individually or as part of our Choice Recommends eCollection.

The Library Lantern is the librarians' quarterly newsletter from Taylor & Francis, bringing you features and news about print books, ebooks, online resources, journals, conferences, white papers, and more. Sign up here.

Plus, you can follow us on twitter @LibraryLantern, Taylor & Francis' twitter account specifically for librarians. We hope you'll connect with us!

]]>Homepage, News, Humanities, Classical Studies2015-01-23T15:08:20+00:00CHOICE Outstanding Academic Titles for 2014http://www.psypress.com/articles/choice_outstanding_academic_titles_for_2014/
tag:,2015:/articles/1.212162015-01-07T13:00:12Q
Each year CHOICE Magazine names a small percentage of the best scholarly works reviewed in their magazine as Outstanding Academic Titles. Routledge is delighted to announce that some of our most popular Classical Studies and Archaeology titles have been chosen for this highly selective list in 2014.

Click here to view the Routledge titles chosen for this prestigious honor, along with select praise from Choice.

The Ancient Near East: History, Society and Economy

“Masterfully integrating textual and archaeological sources, the author weaves a fascinating, enlightening historical narrative, focusing throughout on the interplay among politics, society, economy, ideology, and the environment.” -W Kotter

“Turfa provides a broad yet deep analysis of an ancient Etruria…this work will set the standard upon which other works concerned with these ancient people and their influence must follow.”- P. Lorenzini

“This latest offering in Routledge's "The Ancient World from A to Z" series elegantly blends scholarly precision with an accessible style, making it a pleasure to browse…This compendium should be a welcome addition to any library supporting collections ranging from archaeology to zoology, including classical studies.”- B. Juhl

Learn more about any of these bestsellers by just clicking on the titles below, where you can read the full blurb, view the table of contents, read reviews, and view inside with FREE ACCESS to the first 30 pages!

]]>Homepage, Books, General Interest, Humanities, Classical Studies2014-10-28T16:18:45+00:00Author Nickolas Pappas on Plato’s rhetorichttp://www.psypress.com/articles/author_nickolas_pappas_on_platos_rhetoric/
tag:,2014:/articles/1.203652014-10-15T16:53:30Q
Nickolas Pappas, co-author of Politics and Philosophy in Plato's Menexenus, discusses his research on the Menexenus and Plato's understanding of philosophical dialogue and rhetoric.

It’s easy to imagine the grief among Socrates’ friends after the Athenians convicted and executed him. Some of those friends – Plato for one – must have also been worried that the accusers might come after them next.

But the longer I think about that time, the more I suspect that a third feeling, surprise, was mixed in with the grief and fear. This was not how the associates of Socrates thought the trial would end. It dismayed them to learn that someone would accuse Socrates of impiety and corrupting the youth, but they had seen him in action too many times to be nervous. Arrogant politicians and savvy intellectuals had walked up to Socrates full of themselves, only to be undone by his odd questions. He picked their answers apart and they walked away silenced and humiliated. In the courtroom he’d do the same to his accusers.

Instead the jury voted to convict Socrates. Then, by a larger margin, they voted to execute him. (Some people voted “Not guilty” and then voted for the death penalty. You would only vote that way in a rage.) And in my opinion Plato spent the rest of his life contemplating the difference between a philosophical conversation of the sort that Socrates so easily dominated, and a public speech that he couldn’t seem to produce when his life depended on it. Plato’s dialogues keep returning to the question of rhetoric: how different it is from philosophical discourse, and whether a philosopher might be able to make a public speech. Isn’t philosophical conversation always unemotional, tailored to a single interlocutor, and in pursuit of logical rigor; while a public speech strives to be accessible and persuasive, playing on the crowd’s emotions?

One result of Plato’s contemplation is the patriotic speech in his dialogue Menexenus. Socrates praises Athens, depicting it as a wisely-governed city and the only truly Greek one. He recounts the preceding century of its relations with foreign nations and other Greek cities.

This speech contains the most glaring anachronism in Plato’s works, because Socrates tells the history of Athens down to the year 386 BCE – and he had been executed thirteen years earlier, in 399. Several explanations have been offered for this anachronism, but the psychological account might be the simplest. Plato wrote the Menexenus close to the year its history comes down to, rendering Socrates alive in the present day; and makes Socrates a dexterous public speaker. What if this were his way of expressing a wish? “If only Socrates had known how to speak to a crowd, he’d still be alive today.”

That personal wish for a Socrates who uses rhetoric makes for the most enigmatic work in Plato’s corpus, a genre-crossing philosophical dialogue that takes on the famous funeral oration of Pericles and tries to outdo it. You haven’t seen the full range of Plato’s skills as an author until you have read the result.

How did you and Mark Zelcer come to work on this project?

In the late 1990s I started thinking about the Menexenus and including it in some of my courses. At that time it occurred to me to write something, but I had other projects going, so I did some reading on the Menexenus, and compiled some notes, but I had to set them aside. Then Mark Zelcer approached me. He’d been thinking about the Menexenus independently, and knowing of my own interest in it he wondered if I’d want to work on an article. Even that was some years back, not quite ten years as I recall but close to ten. We began meeting, reading together, reading separately, and writing sections that we then began piecing together.

What made the idea of an article into the idea for a book?

I blame Plato for that. At first we were content to dig into the contrasts between Plato’s funeral speech and the speech by Pericles that it responds to. Then we also started to work on background information – about Aspasia and Pericles; about the tradition of the funeral speech as it is known today, and its relationship to Athenian democracy; about Plato’s attack on rhetoric.

But soon enough we found more in the speech that set it apart from a mere example in a literary genre. Plato’s funeral speech makes suggestions about the nature of praise that line up in fascinating ways with what other dialogues say; and it implies certain claims about education that also complement other dialogues.

Those are the minor points. As we continued to dig into the dialogue we made two substantially larger discoveries. One of these is about the use of autochthony in the Menexenus’s myth of Athens. The Athenian autochthony story is widely known, but it takes unexpected turns in the Menexenus, and Plato connects it with a singular version of Athenian nationalism. He forces autochthony to support a three-way division of humanity into Athenians, all other Greeks, and non-Greeks. The result illuminates Plato’s use of myth in ways that we comment on.

The second discovery, the point that we end our book with, has to do with the logic of the historical narrative. The narrative covers just more than one hundred years, from Athens facing the Persians at Marathon until the King’s Peace, early in the fourth century BCE, by means of which Persia re-established its hegemony over the Greek cities. It’s a tale of decline. As Socrates tells the story it sounds like a string of battles, eleven fights on land and sea involving Athens, with no particular logic to them. It sounds like how people remember their worst history courses. (“In the following year the French army marched through the Pyrenees,” etc.)

In fact, however, we came to see these battles fitting into a progression that mirrors the historical decline of the good city in Plato’s Republic. As the city deteriorates from its philosophical regime through oligarchy and democracy into tyranny, so too the world as Athenians knew it started the fifth century with Athens controlling the other Greek cities and keeping Persia and Egypt under control; then lost its allies and lost dominance over them, and ended the century with Persia (comparable to the city’s productive class) controlling even Athens. This is history writ largest of all.

Well, once we began developing this last point, we were sure that we needed to put all our work into a book.

Do you think more people will be talking about the Menexenus in coming years?

They’ve already begun to. Etienne Helmer is finishing a new French translation and commentary, which should be out by 2015. And earlier this year Mark Zelcer and I both participated in a workshop on the Menexenus whose papers will be coming out as an anthology, Speeches for the Dead, edited by Andreas Avgousti, Harold Parker, and Maximilian Robitzsch. There have been papers on the Menexenus here and there in recent years, but I think this set of books indicates a new momentum to the topic.

I think there’s a specific reason for the change. For over a century there’s been a fairly solid consensus that the funeral speech was a parody of funeral rhetoric. Charles Kahn didn’t particularly think it was, and John Cooper’s introductory note on the Menexenus in his Plato anthology is critical of that reading. Our book agrees with Cooper and amplifies his comment, arguing at length that Plato really sees this funeral speech as an improvement over the rhetoric of Pericles.

Seeing a text as a parody or otherwise some kind of joke really limits how much people want to say about it. It discourages readers from finding substantial philosophical views in the work. When you consider a work like the Menexenus as an attempt at good funeral rhetoric, on the other hand, there’s suddenly much more to say about it, and about the model that it offers to future practitioners of rhetoric.

]]>Homepage, Books, General Interest, Humanities, Classical Studies2014-10-15T16:53:30+00:00Free to View: Special Issue of Mediterranean Historical Reviewhttp://www.psypress.com/articles/free_to_view_special_issue_of_mediterranean_historical_review/
tag:,2014:/articles/1.195672014-09-01T14:59:46Q
Routledge is delighted to announce that Greek and Roman Networks in the Mediterranean, a special issue of Mediterranean Historical Review, is free to view in its entirety for the month of September.

How Do I Access this Free to View Title?

Simply click on the book title then select 'View Inside this Book' and start reading!

Bringing together some of the most active and prominent researchers in ancient history, this book moves beyond political institutions, ethnic, and geographical boundaries in order to observe the ancient Mediterranean through a perspective of network interaction. It employs a wide range of approaches, and to examine relationships and interactions among various social entities in the Mediterranean.

Paperback | 978-0-415-50875-9

]]>Homepage, Books, Research & Reference, Humanities, Classical Studies2014-09-01T14:59:46+00:00Interview with Michael D. Dixon, author of Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Corinth, 338-196 BChttp://www.psypress.com/articles/interview_with_michael_d._dixon_author_of_late_classical_and_early_hellenis/
tag:,2014:/articles/1.195012014-08-15T14:30:01Q
Michael D. Dixon, author of Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Corinth, 338-196 BC, recently answered some questions for us on his research into the world Hellenistic Corinth and the suprising relationship between the the Corinthians and Macedonians.

I first became attracted to Hellenistic history as a graduate student. My specific interest in Corinth developed when I first visited the site in 1996 as a student at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and when I was given the opportunity to excavate there in 1997. I subsequently began to study a 3rd century B.C. inscription that records a border dispute between Corinth and Epidauros, which led to a topographical investigation of the southeastern Corinthia. My interests in both the city and its countryside helped me to understand the relationship between the two and to utilize our evidence from both in order to write Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Corinth, 338-196 B.C.

In your recent research, what has surprised you or challenged you the most?

It is well known that primary historical sources for the Hellenistic period are not as thorough as one would like. Also, the lack of epigraphic evidence from Corinth is extremely limited. These two facts presented the greatest challenge in writing Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Corinth, 338-196 B.C. Also surprising was the relative absence of evidence within the archaeological record of the Macedonians’ presence in Corinth. Nevertheless, I was surprised to conclude that when the disparate evidence was pieced together, a picture emerged demonstrating strongly that the relationship between the Corinthians and Macedonians was not one in which the latter deprived the former of their autonomy, as many scholars had assumed previously.

Briefly, why is it important to understand this period of Corinth's history in a broader study of the Hellenistic world?

The Hellenistic world is one in which Macedonian kings played an extremely important role; it is also one in which countless numbers of cities existed. I have been intrigued always by the nature of the relationships that developed between the Macedonian monarchs and individual cities. Many studies have been written that examine this relationship. Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Corinth, 338-196 B.C. is the first such study that focuses upon Corinth and, I believe, it represents an important contribution to our understanding of this relationship.

What are your favorite books on Late Classical and/or Early Hellenistic history?

There are so many excellent books on Late Classical and Early Hellenistic history. Those that I have enjoyed reading, and from which I have profited include John Ma’s Antiochus III and the Cities of Western Asia Minor (Oxford 2002), Christian Habicht’s Athens. From Alexander to Antony (Harvard 1997), and Graham Oliver’s War, Food, and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens (Oxford 2007). Additionally, I admire greatly the multi-volume series Corinth: Results of the Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Cambridge, MA and Princeton 1932-) as well as John B. Salmon’s Wealthy Corinth. A History of the City to 338 B.C. (Oxford 1984). These selections, not surprisingly, betray my passion for Corinth, the Hellenistic world, and the study of cities within it.

Michael D. Dixon is Associate Professor of History at the University of Southern Indiana, USA.